dlaing Posted March 18, 2009 Posted March 18, 2009 (Again) -- What would you hope to learn from taking voltage readings? The temp/resistance table is a "given", as posted many times. You can calculate voltage readings at temp intervals from the resistance table without measuring, as I think somebody already did. Now (again) -- I asked this before of someone who was apparently "overjoyed" to get the data and got no answer: What would you intend to do with this data, and for what possible purpose? Unless the sensor is faulty, any attempt to accurately extrapolate how it functions on the road from measuring it on a test bench would yield useless information, including measurements of the output with a volt meter. Glad we agree on the value of road testing versus bench testing. But apparently we disagree on the value of reading the sensor output. As for Volt readings, one can see where on the table we are in various road test scenarios. Go for a ride with stock setup, get engine good and hot and do a reading. Add some conductive goo and get the engine good and hot, then do a reading and see where we are. Add cooling finned heat sink, repeat. Are we getting voltage corresponding to over 125C, then I think we may have a problem. What is the voltage reading when we first start getting popping, and misses? How does that correspond to the map in the ECU Do you really see no value in that, and do you believe the seat of your pants and spark plug reading is all that matters? BTW, In what post did you ask about the value of volt readings? Sorry, I did not catch it as I would have happily replied.
Guest ratchethack Posted March 18, 2009 Posted March 18, 2009 . . .As for Volt readings, one can see where on the table we are in various road test scenarios. Why would you need voltage readings to do that? For comparison purposes, voltage outputs of the sensor have no more value than resistance outputs of the sensor, as provided in the table Cliff has on his site (the same table that appears in the Guzzi Service Manual), as numerously copied previously in this thread and found here: http://www.cajinnovations.com/MyECU/temperature.htm By Ohm's Law, I = V/R, (current in amps = potential in volts divided by resistance in ohms, or V = AΩ). Since the base voltage and current are known, they can be set as constants, and the output voltage of the sensor can be calculated at any temperature without measuring, as has been demonstrated in a previous post (copied below). So if the temperature is known, so is both the resistance and the voltage. From my multiple experiments over several weeks as presented previously, it was obvious that when thermo-compound is added to the holder, the temperature at the sensor tip, where the thermistor takes its reading, remains closer to the temp at the head over a greater period of time than it does with an air gap. In BOTH scenarios, however, it was equally obvious that there is a significant LAG TIME in the response of the sensor read to actual temp changes at the head, as determined by the relatively large MASS and THERMAL INERTIA of the sensor body, as discussed previously. As I presented previously in my write-up analysis, it's the LAG TIME in the response of the sensor to temperature changes of the head that is most critical to consider when evaluating sensor/holder modifications. Less lag time = more accurate read = more accurate outputs to the ECU = more accurate FI performance = more accurate A/F = better overall engine performance = better mileage (~43 MPG in my case after adding thermo-compound, heat sink and variable resistor, up from a previous avg. of ~40 MPG). Taking a measure of the sensor output (in either volts or ohms) to gauge the qualitative effectiveness of a sensor/holder combination (with or without thermo-compound, heat sink, or added resistance) as you suggested above would be directly dependent upon a set of combined widely fluctuating variables in normal operation that are nearly impossible to control in order to get readings consistent enough to be of any comparative value whatsoever. This combination of variables includes, but is not limited to: ambient temperature, wind speed and direction, state of engine warm-up, engine load, RPM, throttle, speed of the moto, gear in which operated, etc. -- not to mention how each of these variables go into combined effect on a TIMELINE. For measuring purposes, this raises the necessity of tracking the HISTORY (in minutes and fractions of a minute) of each variable on that timeline leading up to and during a reading to be of any use to evaluate the relative efficiencies of modified and unmodified sensor/holders. (Again) taking measurements OVER TIME would be the entire thrust of my observation of the THERMAL INERTIA and lag-time problem with the sensor, as thoroughly presented and discussed in previous analysis. Even with all of these separate variables accurately and simultaneously tracked on a tape or a single screen, it would be very difficult to achieve consistent enough sensor output numbers from one reading to the next to be of significant value in measuring the lag time response of the sensor/holder by comparing sensor outputs. In other words, I'm suggesting that if you wanted to measure sensor output (in either ohms or volts), that "going for a ride, get it hot, and take a reading" would be "shooting in the dark", being entirely blind to all the above. Based on my experience testing every sensor/holder combination conceivable (and some not conceivable by at least a few hereabouts ), it would give widely inconsistent readings from one trial to the next, even measuring the SAME sensor/holder as you've suggested. By all means, give it a go, but based on what I've learned in my experiments as noted, I'm suggesting that attempting to do this would not be worth the effort, even under the most ideal conditions. If you could get 5 readings from the same sensor/holder to line up anywhere in the same ballpark on 5 different days, I'd be waaaaaaay past amazed, and deep into disbelief. It ain't gonna happen. . . .In what post did you ask about the value of volt readings?Sorry, I did not catch it as I would have happily replied. Here's the post where I questioned the value of knowing voltage outputs: Please tell us, . . . exactly what the above set of data assumptions explains to you, and since you've been "fishing for this kind of argumentation for quite awhile now", what "argumentation", exactly, would that be? Try as I might, I just don't see any argument -- anywhere in this thread -- with any of the data Raz posted?? I mean, this is all well and good as far as academic information goes, and kudo's to Raz for doing the conversions -- but if this is exactly what you've been looking for as you state above. . . now that you have it, I'd like to know what you intend to do with it?? This (again) is the posted data referred to above: Here are the voltages1) and, more importantly, what the ECU reads2). The ADC column is what the AD converter should end up with. It's an integer between 0 (0 volts) and 1023 (5 volts). °C ohms mV ADC -40 100950 4927 1009 -30 53100 4863 996 -20 29120 4755 974 -10 16600 4586 939 0 9750 4333 887 10 5970 3996 818 20 3750 3571 731 25 3000 3333 683 30 2420 3087 632 40 1600 2581 529 50 1080 2093 429 60 750 1667 341 70 525 1296 265 80 380 1011 207 90 275 775 159 100 205 601 123 110 155 468 96 125 100 313 64 1, 2) this is based on the assumptions the ECU use a 1K5 fixed bridge resistor and a 10 bit ADC, like MyECU. I do not know for sure if that is the case. As noted above by Raz, this is based on ASSUMPTIONS of both the existence of and value of a fixed bridge resistor and a 10-bit ADC, which were NOT KNOWN TO BE VALID for the V11 ECU. Again, regardless of this set of assumptions, I fail to understand what possible value voltage readings provide to this discussion. As I noted previously, all the sensor output data is on the INPUT side of the ECU. As I pointed out before, none of it provides the faintest indication of what the ECU does with this input to adjust FI pulsewidth output at the injectors and the A/F. The ECU, of course, aggregates the head temp input with such additional inputs as air sensor, TPS sensor, and timing sensor inputs to come up with the pulsewidth signal output to the FI. Go for a ride with stock setup, get engine good and hot and do a reading.Add some conductive goo and get the engine good and hot, then do a reading and see where we are. Add cooling finned heat sink, repeat. What is the voltage reading when we first start getting popping, and misses? How does that correspond to the map in the ECU Do you really see no value in that. . .? Exactly right. Based on my own testing, I really, truly see no value whatsoever in doing what you've suggested. . . .do you believe the seat of your pants and spark plug reading is all that matters? At no point have I as much as hinted that seat of the pants and spark plug reading is "all that matters". Quite the opposite. What I have posted (repeatedly, and specifically in reply to you, Dave) is the suggestion that a far more ideal setup for testing head temp sensor/holders would be in "laboratory" conditions with a brake dyno in a wind tunnel, and a brace of diagnostic gear and thermocouples connected with a long tangle of cables and wires. I've also repeatedly posted that LACKING THAT, testing on the road is the ONLY viable alternative. But I tire of repeating myself, it makes me lose interest, and I gotta go now.
Guest ratchethack Posted March 20, 2009 Posted March 20, 2009 Nine more pages, boys. You can do it . . . Hm. You seem to've been making a considerable contribution yourself, Greg -- with all the continually repeated encouragement alone. . .
Greg Field Posted March 20, 2009 Posted March 20, 2009 I am a huge fan of excellence and just want to make sure that this thread achieves the lofty Bloviation Quotient (BQ) to which it aspires . . .
Guest ratchethack Posted March 20, 2009 Posted March 20, 2009 Lofty bloviation or no, I've seldom found worthwhile contributions of new ideas to this Forum based on real-world experience and valid analysis (as opposed to dreamy speculation shooting off in all directions based on no experience, little knowledge, and grotesquely malformed illogic) that don't draw considerable ground fire from those who reflexively jump into defense mode, believing their ox is being gored. . . imagined or otherwise . . . The heavier and more sustained the flak, the greater the perceived threat. . . And so it goes. . . I reckon this thread has more in it than another 9 pages. Could be a few ideas hereabouts will be "discovered" to have merit by at least a few others before it goes cold. . . Here's to the continuation of excellence via the advancement of knowledge based on ideas proven on the road. Hey -- it could happen.
dlaing Posted March 20, 2009 Posted March 20, 2009 Lofty bloviation or no, I've seldom found worthwhile contributions of new ideas to this Forum based on real-world experience and valid analysis (as opposed to dreamy speculation shooting off in all directions based on nothing) that don't draw considerable ground fire from those who reflexively jump into defense mode, believing their ox is being gored. . . imagined or otherwise . . . The greater the defense thrown up, the greater the perceived threat. . . And so it goes. . . I reckon this thread has more in it than another 9 pages. Could be a few ideas hereabouts will be "discovered" to have merit by at least a few others before it goes cold. . . Here's to the continuation of excellence via the advancement of knowledge based on proven ideas. Hey -- it could happen. I think we can get atleast 9 pages of arguing about voltage readings. For starters, you don't seem to get the difference between doing actual voltage readings and referring to Raz's chart. Claiming that you already asked what the value is of doing actual voltage readings, you previously only asked what is the value of the voltage figure on the chart, (that will change depending on the bridge resistor) but somehow when you aske that question, you also meant the value of real world readings. I think it is just your knee jerk rhetorical response, and not part of constructive discussion. I'd list a few more examples of the value of voltage readings, AND Raz's chart, but you have clearly built a fortress of thought up to defend against absolute Truth. Your response could be good for ten pages alone of digressive argument about Philistines, Palestinians, conspiracies of Tyranny, UN scientists, and Al Gore. I'll bet you don't appreciate the value of temperature readings when it comes to studying global warming! Voltage output corresponds to ACTUAL temperature. Voltage output corresponds to ACTUAL temperature. Voltage output corresponds to ACTUAL temperature. Voltage output corresponds to ACTUAL temperature. Voltage output corresponds to ACTUAL temperature. Voltage output corresponds to ACTUAL temperature. Voltage output corresponds to ACTUAL temperature. Voltage output corresponds to ACTUAL temperature. Voltage output corresponds to ACTUAL temperature. Voltage output corresponds to ACTUAL temperature. Voltage output corresponds to ACTUAL temperature. Voltage output corresponds to ACTUAL temperature. Voltage output corresponds to ACTUAL temperature. Voltage output corresponds to ACTUAL temperature. etc.
Guest ratchethack Posted March 20, 2009 Posted March 20, 2009 Here's to the continuation of excellence via the advancement of knowledge based on ideas proven on the road. Hey -- it could happen. But then again. . . in some cases this is going to be entirely too much to expect. . . It seems the trademarked Great Shooting Off in All Directions has begun in earnest (again). . . . . .[sigh]. . . . . .you have clearly built a fortress of thought up to defend against absolute Truth.. . . . . . UN scientists. . . Al Gore. . . global warming. . . Uh-oh. . . Conjuring up your favorite Witch Doctors. . . this can't be a good sign. . . Pretty scary, alright. . . Are you really now proposing to promote and defend "absolute Truth" here, Dave? But. . . but. . . according to you, Dave, THERE IS NO ABSOLUTE TRUTH. You've repeatedly argued that TRUTH IS SUBJECTIVE, and that EVERYONE HAS THEIR OWN TRUTH. . . Truth is subjective . . . So which is it today -- or does it vary?. . . You clearly fail to comprehend that voltage and resistance are directly related, and that measuring one has the same merit as measuring the other, and that BOTH resistance and voltage correspond to ACTUAL temperature on the sensor output chart, as I clearly explained with reference to Ohm's law. This is basic Junior High School Physics, Dave. You also clearly fail to comprehend that either way, it does not provide anything of value, as I have clearly explained, based on many weeks of actual hands-on experiments with head temp sensor/holders. I'd list a few more examples of the value of voltage readings, AND Raz's chart. . .. . . Voltage output corresponds to ACTUAL temperature. . . .[ad nauseum]. . . Oh, Please! If you can CLEARLY explain how resistance output DOES NOT correspond to actual temperature here the way voltage output does, Dave, I'm sure all of us still following this would be most interested. Just one example would be sufficient, but since you have "a few more", by all means do provide your entire list. . . . And please don't forget to explain how taking voltage measurements would provide any more value than taking resistance measurements in this scenario: Go for a ride with stock setup, get engine good and hot and do a reading.Add some conductive goo and get the engine good and hot, then do a reading and see where we are. Add cooling finned heat sink, repeat. Rapt with wonder and anticipation, an entire V11 world, hungry for knowledge and the advancement of excellence, awaits your reply. . .
Greg Field Posted March 21, 2009 Posted March 21, 2009 Yes. AM I not the puppetmaster? The BQ curve is tending toward vertical . . .
Guzzi2Go Posted March 21, 2009 Posted March 21, 2009 Puppetmaster indeed... On the other hand, this thread began to spill. We have considerable thermal inertia leakage with negligible lag time. Will someone mop it up? Or at least add a heatsink?
dlaing Posted March 21, 2009 Posted March 21, 2009 Oh, Please! If you can CLEARLY explain how resistance output DOES NOT correspond to actual temperature here the way voltage output does, Dave, I'm sure all of us still following this would be most interested. Just one example would be sufficient, but since you have "a few more", by all means do provide your entire list. Resistance DOES correspond to actual temperature the way voltage output does. Why would you want me to explain otherwise? FWIW Resistance does not "output", voltage outputs. You can't measure the resistance while road testing, by you can measure the voltage and then infer the resistance, if you have the right formula or chart. By the way, what is the formula? Raz gave a chart showing voltage with bridged resistor, but I think we would be measuring the voltage with no bridge resistor, so how would the Volts fit into the Ohms/temperature chart? Ratchet obviously does not care about knowing the Ohms, the Volts, nor the Temperature. After all, he has engine sputtering to tell him it is too hot and fuel consumption to tell him it is too cold slow.
Guest ratchethack Posted March 21, 2009 Posted March 21, 2009 . . .a fortress of thought . . . to defend against absolute Truth. Truth is subjective and faulty as mine MAY be, it's more more close to the truth in the reality we all share than ratchet's truth. Such utter confusion^ does take a formidable toll, no doubt about it. . . . . .Raz gave a chart showing voltage with bridged resistor, but I think we would be measuring the voltage with no bridge resistor, so how would the Volts fit into the Ohms/temperature chart?. . . Looks like it's time once again for you to give one o' these^ a serious workout, Dave. . .
Orson Posted March 21, 2009 Posted March 21, 2009 I noticed that it seems the the original poster, nigeV11, never posted again in this thread
dlaing Posted March 21, 2009 Posted March 21, 2009 Such utter confusion^ does take a formidable toll, no doubt about it. . . Looks like it's time once again for you to give one o' these^ a serious workout, Dave. . . Huh? Paddling your ass is not a fair punishment for you!
Recommended Posts